Skip to content

docs(useBodyScrollLock): align English and plugin docs with Korean docs - #489

Open
Antoliny0919 wants to merge 1 commit into
toss:mainfrom
Antoliny0919:ko-en-consistency
Open

docs(useBodyScrollLock): align English and plugin docs with Korean docs#489
Antoliny0919 wants to merge 1 commit into
toss:mainfrom
Antoliny0919:ko-en-consistency

Conversation

@Antoliny0919

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Overview

The Korean and English documentation for useBodyScrollLock differ in content and should be aligned for consistency.
The Korean documentation also seems more relevant and informative, particularly with examples such as using multiple modals.

@changeset-bot

changeset-bot Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: c5d44dc

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@codecov-commenter

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (64d0c6e) to head (c5d44dc).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #489   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           69        69           
  Lines         2280      2280           
  Branches       737       737           
=========================================
  Hits          2280      2280           
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@Antoliny0919

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hello Hello 👋

It looks like CI is failing because the JSDoc and the documentation don’t match.

Does this mean the intention is for JSDoc and the documentation to contain exactly the same content?

I feel that while they serve similar purposes, they may need different levels of detail. JSDoc should focus on the essential interface information someone needs when using an API, while the documentation can include more examples and caveats alongside that information, as it does now.

From that perspective, the tight coupling between JSDoc and the documentation feels limiting, especially in situations like this. If we can’t manage the documentation independently, adding more detailed explanations could cause problems.
How should we approach this?

Personally, I’m not sure automatic documentation generation is essential. For a library like react-simplikit, which provides relatively simple hooks and functions, keeping JSDoc and the documentation aligned may be feasible. But that also means there isn’t a large amount of documentation to maintain, so managing it manually may not be particularly costly either.

Perhaps the core question isn’t whether we should generate documentation automatically, but whether JSDoc and the documentation should contain exactly the same content. The generation process can become a problem when it enforces that requirement. For example, if we update the English documentation now and run the generator afterward, those changes will be overwritten by the content from JSDoc. This suggests it may be worth reconsidering the scope of automatic generation.

I’d appreciate the chance to discuss these broader questions about how we manage documentation together 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants